Cargando…

The global polarisation of remote work

The Covid-19 pandemic has led to the rise of digitally enabled remote work with consequences for the global division of labour. Remote work could connect labour markets, but it might also increase spatial polarisation. However, our understanding of the geographies of remote work is limited. Specific...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Braesemann, Fabian, Stephany, Fabian, Teutloff, Ole, Kässi, Otto, Graham, Mark, Lehdonvirta, Vili
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9584402/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36264859
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274630
_version_ 1784813256471216128
author Braesemann, Fabian
Stephany, Fabian
Teutloff, Ole
Kässi, Otto
Graham, Mark
Lehdonvirta, Vili
author_facet Braesemann, Fabian
Stephany, Fabian
Teutloff, Ole
Kässi, Otto
Graham, Mark
Lehdonvirta, Vili
author_sort Braesemann, Fabian
collection PubMed
description The Covid-19 pandemic has led to the rise of digitally enabled remote work with consequences for the global division of labour. Remote work could connect labour markets, but it might also increase spatial polarisation. However, our understanding of the geographies of remote work is limited. Specifically, in how far could remote work connect employers and workers in different countries? Does it bring jobs to rural areas because of lower living costs, or does it concentrate in large cities? And how do skill requirements affect competition for employment and wages? We use data from a fully remote labour market—an online labour platform—to show that remote platform work is polarised along three dimensions. First, countries are globally divided: North American, European, and South Asian remote platform workers attract most jobs, while many Global South countries participate only marginally. Secondly, remote jobs are pulled to large cities; rural areas fall behind. Thirdly, remote work is polarised along the skill axis: workers with in-demand skills attract profitable jobs, while others face intense competition and obtain low wages. The findings suggest that agglomerative forces linked to the unequal spatial distribution of skills, human capital, and opportunities shape the global geography of remote work. These forces pull remote work to places with institutions that foster specialisation and complex economic activities, i. e. metropolitan areas focused on information and communication technologies. Locations without access to these enabling institutions—in many cases, rural areas—fall behind. To make remote work an effective tool for economic and rural development, it would need to be complemented by local skill-building, infrastructure investment, and labour market programmes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9584402
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95844022022-10-21 The global polarisation of remote work Braesemann, Fabian Stephany, Fabian Teutloff, Ole Kässi, Otto Graham, Mark Lehdonvirta, Vili PLoS One Research Article The Covid-19 pandemic has led to the rise of digitally enabled remote work with consequences for the global division of labour. Remote work could connect labour markets, but it might also increase spatial polarisation. However, our understanding of the geographies of remote work is limited. Specifically, in how far could remote work connect employers and workers in different countries? Does it bring jobs to rural areas because of lower living costs, or does it concentrate in large cities? And how do skill requirements affect competition for employment and wages? We use data from a fully remote labour market—an online labour platform—to show that remote platform work is polarised along three dimensions. First, countries are globally divided: North American, European, and South Asian remote platform workers attract most jobs, while many Global South countries participate only marginally. Secondly, remote jobs are pulled to large cities; rural areas fall behind. Thirdly, remote work is polarised along the skill axis: workers with in-demand skills attract profitable jobs, while others face intense competition and obtain low wages. The findings suggest that agglomerative forces linked to the unequal spatial distribution of skills, human capital, and opportunities shape the global geography of remote work. These forces pull remote work to places with institutions that foster specialisation and complex economic activities, i. e. metropolitan areas focused on information and communication technologies. Locations without access to these enabling institutions—in many cases, rural areas—fall behind. To make remote work an effective tool for economic and rural development, it would need to be complemented by local skill-building, infrastructure investment, and labour market programmes. Public Library of Science 2022-10-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9584402/ /pubmed/36264859 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274630 Text en © 2022 Braesemann et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Braesemann, Fabian
Stephany, Fabian
Teutloff, Ole
Kässi, Otto
Graham, Mark
Lehdonvirta, Vili
The global polarisation of remote work
title The global polarisation of remote work
title_full The global polarisation of remote work
title_fullStr The global polarisation of remote work
title_full_unstemmed The global polarisation of remote work
title_short The global polarisation of remote work
title_sort global polarisation of remote work
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9584402/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36264859
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274630
work_keys_str_mv AT braesemannfabian theglobalpolarisationofremotework
AT stephanyfabian theglobalpolarisationofremotework
AT teutloffole theglobalpolarisationofremotework
AT kassiotto theglobalpolarisationofremotework
AT grahammark theglobalpolarisationofremotework
AT lehdonvirtavili theglobalpolarisationofremotework
AT braesemannfabian globalpolarisationofremotework
AT stephanyfabian globalpolarisationofremotework
AT teutloffole globalpolarisationofremotework
AT kassiotto globalpolarisationofremotework
AT grahammark globalpolarisationofremotework
AT lehdonvirtavili globalpolarisationofremotework